Are we expecting him to singlehandedly rebuild twitter lol. He's one proficient hand when Elon needs thousands.
Obviously he's not going to build a new one, but I think his reverse engineering skill is valuable though especially no one is around to explain how the fuck twitter works
The entire George Hotz diversion of this thread was utterly puzzling to read when considering the context that he is being hired as an intern. You might have assumed he was going to be senior director of software engineering with how some people were trying to frame his skills as a mismatch for the job.
I'll just reiterate again, institutional knowledge is absolutely critical. Can't be overstated, IMO.
You can bring in anyone you want, but if there is no one left to teach the specifics for that company, it will take dramatically longer if it can be done at all.
There's going to be a bunch of stuff they'll have to rebuild from scratch or reverse engineer. Have fun, dipshits!
Well that and Jobs was very big on being deliberate and slow to the market, not just shooting from the hip.
The big issue here is Musk does not have a vision for Twitter other than what he wants it to be. That may sound weird, but wanting something to be a certain way and having a clear vision to GET there are two different things.
I think these posts help to highlight Musk's biggest misstep with Twitter: he is seemingly making impulsive decisions without any sort of deliberation that's supported by a planned vision.
His firing of half of Twitters staff is something that could conceivably be weathered; at least in that case he had the luxury of choosing who would be leaving the company. His resignation offer last week was a strategic blunder of significant proportions, though. In the latter case, you have no idea who is leaving your company. You could be losing a massive amount of invaluable institutional knowledge, critical systems staff could leave, and you may be left with little ability to hire and train new staff if you have critical gaps to fill. The resignation offer was a move wherein you can't reasonably predict the outcome. It honestly feels like something that would be antithetical to fundamental strategic teachings in a book like The Art of War.
Imagine if an entire team/department at your workplace all resigned. Who would be left at the company that understood the role and responsibilities of those jobs? Who could make competent hiring decisions if managers who have a first-hand understanding of the role are all gone? Who could train new staff once they are hired? What if your payroll staff left? Or accounts payable? Or your legal team? Or critical infrastructure engineers? How long could you proceed if you're overwhelmed with problems and lawsuits when you're lacking the personnel who are equipped respond?
When an new CEO joins a company, there is typically a transition period where they learn all aspects of the business and current operations, have numerous meetings with staff of all levels to build a base of knowledge, and then map out an informed strategic vision throughout that process. Here, there are no indications Musk has done any of that. By all accounts, he has joined an existing large,
profit-driven business that he knows very little about and has made immediate, sweeping, unpredictable changes without understanding the implications of those decisions. I also stress that Twitter was profit-driven because that's what presumably guided its business structure, staffing, etc. As a publicly traded company, it's illogical to assume Twitter was employing 300% more staff than it needed to effectively grow revenues and generate a profit.
You have to wonder how much of these decisions were driven by Musk's ego/personality and how much were because he understands Twitter was a terrible investment that he never truly wanted and he needs to quickly reign in the rate the company burns through revenues lest he risks destroying his personal fortune.